Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • For authors
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Author FAQs
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • For authors
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Author FAQs
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions

Home-monitoring reduced short stay admissions in suspected COVID-19 patients: COVID-box project

Ebru Dirikgil, Rick Roos, Geert H. Groeneveld, Christian Heringhaus, Annemiek V. Silven, Annelieke H.J. Petrus, Maria Villalobos-Quesada, Roula Tsonaka, Paul J.M. van der Boog, Ton J. Rabelink, Willem Jan W. Bos, Niels H. Chavannes, Douwe E. Atsma, Y.K. Onno Teng
European Respiratory Journal 2021; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00636-2021
Ebru Dirikgil
1Department of Nephrology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rick Roos
2Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Geert H. Groeneveld
3Department of Infectious diseases, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christian Heringhaus
4Department of Emergency Medicine, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Annemiek V. Silven
5Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
6National eHealth Living Lab, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Annemiek V. Silven
Annelieke H.J. Petrus
5Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
6National eHealth Living Lab, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Maria Villalobos-Quesada
5Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
6National eHealth Living Lab, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Roula Tsonaka
7Department of Medical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Paul J.M. van der Boog
1Department of Nephrology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ton J. Rabelink
1Department of Nephrology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Willem Jan W. Bos
1Department of Nephrology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
8Department of Internal Medicine, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Niels H. Chavannes
5Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
6National eHealth Living Lab, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Douwe E. Atsma
6National eHealth Living Lab, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
9Department of Cardiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Y.K. Onno Teng
1Department of Nephrology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: y.k.o.teng@lumc.nl
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Most COVID-19 cases can be managed in the outpatient setting, however approximately 10–15% deteriorate and require hospitalisation [1, 2]. Worldwide, including the Netherlands, the COVID-19 pandemic causes severe pressure on the national healthcare system and laboratory testing capacity [3]. Home-monitoring has been suggested as potentially beneficial to monitor (suspected) COVID-19 patients while reducing hospital admissions and viral exposure to healthcare workers [4]. We performed a retrospective single-center case-control study on the implementation of a home-monitoring programme of suspected COVID-19 patients presenting to the Emergency Department (ED) of the Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC, the Netherlands). Home-monitoring in this study, refered to the clinical pathway (the COVID-box project) in which patients were given tools and devices (blood pressure monitor, pulse oximeter, thermometer and concomitant instructions) upon discharge from the ED to monitor their vital parameters at home three times a day combined with daily teleconsultations (preferably videoconsultations) carried out by a healthcare professional, as extensively reviewed elsewhere [5]. The healthcare professional was a nurse practitioner or resident supervised by a medical specialist. When patients arrived home, e-health consultants contacted patients to ensure digital on-boarding of patients, giving instructions and guidance for adequate use of the devices. Thereafter, daily teleconsultations were conducted to assess patients’ symptoms and vital parameters based upon which an indication for reassessment at the ED was made. Also, patients were given the possibility to actively contact our healthcare professionals in case of deviating measurements from personalised target values or progressive complaints. When reassessment was indicated, patients were seen at the ED of the LUMC. Home-monitoring ended when patients recovered or were (re)admitted to the hospital.

In this study, our source population consisted of all patients that visited the ED from March 1st through June 15th, 2020 and who were suspected of COVID-19, i.e. had flu-like symptoms and/or at least one diagnostic test for COVID-19 performed (e.g. nasopharyngeal swab and/or Computed Tomography (CT)-scan). Physicians were given the possibility to allocate home-monitoring to patients suspected for COVID-19. Allocation was based on physicians’ clinical judgement for patients with moderate symptoms or underlying comorbidities posing patients at risk for worse prognosis [6]. To assess the effect of implementing a home-monitoring system, we matched each patient discharged with home-monitoring to two control patients who were discharged without home-monitoring. Propensity-score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to match cases to controls in a 1:2 ratio using R statistical software 4.0.3 [7]. We used nearest neighbor PSM without replacement with a propensity score estimated using logistic regression of the group on the covariates: nasopharyngeal swab, CT scan, age, sex, Charlson comorbidity index [8], chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease and immunocompromised state [6]. This study was approved by our local medical ethics committee and did not allow accessing EMRs of other hospitals.

In total 55 patients with home-monitoring were compared to 110 matched patients discharged without home-monitoring (table 1). As primary outcome, the number of total hospital admissions for related to COVID-19 after visiting the ED within 28 days of follow-up was assessed and demonstrated 9% hospitalisations (5/55 patients) in the home-monitoring group compared to 27% (30/110 patients) the control group. This equals to a risk ratio of 0.27 (95%CI 0.097–0.733; p=0.007) for hospitalisation. The median duration of home-monitoring was 4 days [IQR 3–7]. Noteworthy, 25/30 (83%) admissions in the control group could be classified as “short-stay admissions”, i.e. less than 24 h.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1

Characteristics of suspected COVID-19 patients at the emergency department (propensity score-matched)

As secondary endpoints we observed that 47 home-monitored patients (85%) completed the follow-up duration of 28 days without ED reassessment compared to 76 patients (69%) in the control-group (p=0.023). We calculated that the bed occupancy was 20 days per 100 patients discharged with home-monitoring compared to 47 days per 100 patients discharged without home-monitoring, equal to a 58% reduction.

The present study is the first controlled study demonstrating the effectiveness of home-monitoring for suspected COVID-19 patients to reduce hospitalisations. In a systematic literature search 16 relevant studies have reported on different concepts of home-monitoring in patients with suspected/confirmed COVID-19 infection. Taken all reports together, 92% [IQR 83–96] of the patients could stay at home while surveyed with home-monitoring and 5% [IQR 2–10] required hospital admissions. Altogether, reported studies confirm the safety of home-monitoring for suspected as wel as established COVID-19 patients. The low frequency of hospital admissions further corroborated our observation that hospital admission can be reduced with home-monitoring strategies.

It is important to note that the positive results of our study were largely explained by a reduction in so-called “short stay admissions”, i.e. less than 24 h. An in-depth analysis showed that 9/25 (36%) did not receive any treatment or received only oral antibiotics. Both compatible with the assumptions that these patients could have been managed through-home-monitoring. In 12/25 (48%) of short stay admissions oxygen supplementation was given and tapered within 24 h, illustrating the heterogeneity of the indication to start oxygen therapy. It is plausible that the latter can potentially be replaced or influenced by the option of home-monitoring. Not unimportant, home-monitoring indirectly reduces viral exposure for healthcare workers and other non-COVID patients which is an invisible benefit during the current pandemic.

In our study, the number of COVID-19 confirmed cases was higher in the home-monitoring group despite the equal frequency of COVID-19 diagnostics performed. The difference of confirmed COVID-19 cases between the groups is likely due to physicians’ adequate risk-assessment of patients with suspected symptoms. For our study, it re-affirms the effectiveness of home-monitoring to reduce hospitalisation rate despite the overrepresentation of COVID-19 patients in the home-monitoring group. However, we need to be careful in drawing definitive conclusions on the efficacy of home-monitoring for confirmed COVID-19 infection.

The low number of (re)admissions and the high proportion of patients surveyed at home are encouraging results for healthcare providers to consider strategies of home-monitoring. Our study provides evidence that home-monitoring can indeed bring relief to the burden that the COVID-19 pandemic puts on hospitals. However, implementation of home-monitoring is not without costs and efforts when hospital management teams want to consider implementing a home-monitoring strategy. Our local clinical practice of home-monitoring of patients after myocardial infarction or kidney transplantation were the base to extend home-monitoring to suspected COVID-19 patients at a time that the COVID-testing capacity was limited in the Netherlands [9, 10]. The latter, together with the retrospective approach of the study, were a limitation to the study. Therefore, our study addressed these issue by employing a propensity score-matching case-control design based on the diagnostic tests conducted and the comorbidities that could have influenced the clinical outcome of patients. Importantly during this period of shortages, diagnostic testing with nasopharyngeal swabs and CT scans would indicate a strong suspicion of COVID-19 infection.

In conclusion, we demonstrated the potential of home-monitoring to reduce hospital admissions by safely surveying clinical symptoms and vitals. These encouraging results should be further corroborated in larger patient groups and notably in patients with a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis.

Support statement: ZonMw; DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001826; Grant: 5000.9948.

Footnotes

  • Conflict of interest: Dr. Dirikgil reports grants from ZonMW, during the conduct of the study; .

  • Conflict of interest: Dr. Roos has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: Dr. Groeneveld has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: Dr. Heringhaus has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: Dr. Silven has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: Dr. Petrus has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: Dr. Villalobos-Quesada has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: Dr. Tsonaka has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: Dr. van der Boog has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: Dr. Rabelink has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: Dr. Bos has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: Dr. Chavannes has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: Dr. Atsma has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: Dr. Teng reports grants from ZonMW, during the conduct of the study; .

  • Received January 22, 2021.
  • Accepted March 21, 2021.
  • ©The authors 2021.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This version is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0. For commercial reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions{at}ersnet.org

References

  1. ↵
    1. Gandhi RT,
    2. Lynch JB,
    3. Del Rio C
    . Mild or moderate covid-19. N Engl J Med 2020.
  2. ↵
    1. Wu Z,
    2. McGoogan JM
    . Characteristics of and important lessons from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in China: summary of a report of 72314 cases from the Chinese Center for disease control and prevention. JAMA 2020.
  3. ↵
    1. (RIVM) RvVeM
    . Soorten coronatesten en testcapaciteit 2020. www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/coronavirus-covid-19/testen/soorten-testen
  4. ↵
    1. Hollander JE,
    2. Carr BG
    . Virtually perfect? telemedicine for covid-19. N Engl J Med 2020; 382: 1679–1681. doi:10.1056/NEJMp2003539
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Silven AV,
    2. Petrus AHJ,
    3. Villalobos-Quesada M, et al.
    Telemonitoring for patients with COVID-19: recommendations for design and implementation. J Med Internet Res 2020; 22: e20953. doi:10.2196/20953
    OpenUrl
  6. ↵
    1. Williamson EJ,
    2. Walker AJ,
    3. Bhaskaran K, et al.
    OpenSAFELY: factors associated with COVID-19 death in 17 million patients. Nature 2020.
  7. ↵
    1. Team RC
    . R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2020.
  8. ↵
    1. Charlson M,
    2. Szatrowski TP,
    3. Peterson J, et al.
    Validation of a combined comorbidity index. J Clin Epidemiol 1994; 47: 1245–1251. doi:10.1016/0895-4356(94)90129-5
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  9. ↵
    1. Treskes RW,
    2. van Winden LAM,
    3. van Keulen N, et al.
    Effect of smartphone-enabled health monitoring devices vs regular follow-up on blood pressure control among patients after myocardial infarction: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Netw Open 2020; 3: e202165. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.2165
    OpenUrl
  10. ↵
    1. van Lint CL,
    2. van der Boog PJ,
    3. Wang W, et al.
    Patient experiences with self-monitoring renal function after renal transplantation: results from a single-center prospective pilot study. Patient Prefer Adherence 2015; 9: 1721–1731. doi:10.2147/PPA.S92108
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top
View this article with LENS
Vol 57 Issue 4 Table of Contents
European Respiratory Journal: 57 (4)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Home-monitoring reduced short stay admissions in suspected COVID-19 patients: COVID-box project
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
Home-monitoring reduced short stay admissions in suspected COVID-19 patients: COVID-box project
Ebru Dirikgil, Rick Roos, Geert H. Groeneveld, Christian Heringhaus, Annemiek V. Silven, Annelieke H.J. Petrus, Maria Villalobos-Quesada, Roula Tsonaka, Paul J.M. van der Boog, Ton J. Rabelink, Willem Jan W. Bos, Niels H. Chavannes, Douwe E. Atsma, Y.K. Onno Teng
European Respiratory Journal Jan 2021, 2100636; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00636-2021

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Home-monitoring reduced short stay admissions in suspected COVID-19 patients: COVID-box project
Ebru Dirikgil, Rick Roos, Geert H. Groeneveld, Christian Heringhaus, Annemiek V. Silven, Annelieke H.J. Petrus, Maria Villalobos-Quesada, Roula Tsonaka, Paul J.M. van der Boog, Ton J. Rabelink, Willem Jan W. Bos, Niels H. Chavannes, Douwe E. Atsma, Y.K. Onno Teng
European Respiratory Journal Jan 2021, 2100636; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00636-2021
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

  • SARS-CoV-2 infections in people with PCD: neither frequent, nor particularly severe
  • Integrating hemodynamics identifies an extreme pulmonary hypertension phenotype
  • Risk of acute arterial and venous thromboembolic events in Eosinophilic Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis (Churg-Strauss syndrome)
Show more Research letter

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About the ERJ

  • Journal information
  • Editorial board
  • Reviewers
  • CME
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Instructions for authors
  • Submit a manuscript
  • ERS author centre

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • Podcasts
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Print ISSN:  0903-1936
Online ISSN: 1399-3003

Copyright © 2021 by the European Respiratory Society